Alternative Leadership at Good Sport, Xerox Corporation and Microsoft

Abstract

In today’s highly competitive business world, companies face new challenges daily. Good Sports is not the first company that changed their strategy in order to better manage the organization. The company’s organizational structure, culture, conflict management and emotional intelligence were analyzed. Good Sports’ strategies were compared and contrasted with Microsoft and Xerox. When faced with issues similar to Good Sports, both Microsoft and Xerox opted to change strategies. Realizing the problem and implementing change helped both companies move toward becoming more successful. Good Sports, too, can make this move by implementing strategies that strengthen the organizational culture and structure.

Introduction

In Managing across the Organizations simulation, Good Sport’s group dynamics added to the overall objectives of keeping up with the latest trends of their marketplace. The senior manager of research and development continued to excel in his job functions as high standing performance was achieved. In each organizational level, he encountered challenges in structure and culture as his roles changed, encouraging him to find adaptable strategies. The organizational dynamics of interpersonal and various conflict management sources were pervasive from sales to production and finally upper management. “Conflict management refers to interventions that alter the level and form of conflict in ways that maximize its benefits and minimize its dysfunctional consequences. This sometimes means increasing the level of constructive conflict.” (McShane & Von Glinow, Ch. 13)

The previous CEO’s management style did not encourage independence, initiative, and creativity, rarely promoting talent or motivating employees. The new CEO found staff morale, productivity, and performance suffering from a cultural environment previously mismanaged by controlling information to limit support, coordination and confidence of employee capabilities to gain influence over success of organizational objectives. He chose to respond by empowering each managerial level and distribute decision making ability to successfully achieve Good Sport’s objectives to excel in their marketplace. He provided each level the ability to be responsive for quickly making decision to effect change, accountable for their actions to evaluate objectives and offer fresh perspectives on vision and through empowerment of new roles an increased respective function, building stronger levels of trust with interdependency.

Comparatively, Microsoft and Xerox recognized their management teams needed assessing to determine readiness and adaptability for their ever changing market. These CEO’s were convinced management was not prepared nor receptive to changes headed their way or that either company would emerge as leaders of their industry.